The Supreme Court on Tuesday pulled up the president of the Indian Medical Association (IMA), Dr RV Asokan, for his remarks about the court's observation on the conduct of doctors.
The IMA had petitioned the court in a case involving Patanjali Ayurved, but the bench of Justice Hima Kohli and Justice A Amanullah pulled up the organisation over an interview by its president, Dr Asokan, in which he commented on the case.
The Supreme Court said the view of the court (in the Patanjali case) equally applied to the IMA.
While talking to a news agency, IMA President Asokan made certain remarks that the court deemed to be an interference in its proceedings. "You say the other side (Patanjali Ayurved) is misleading, running your medicine down, but what were you doing?" the bench asked.
Senior advocate PS Patwalia, appearing for the Indian Medical Association, argued that the remark was taken out of context.
“It was a leading question and he (IMA President) fell into it!” Patwalia said.
In response, the Supreme Court said, "Let us make it clear, this court is not expecting any pats on the back. This court has also received its share of brickbats. We also have broad shoulders, but…!".
Balkrishna, the managing director of Patanjali Ayurved, had approached the court over Dr Asokan's interview, contending that his statements were a direct interference in the court's proceedings. "These statements are condemnable in nature and a clear attempt to lower the dignity of this Honourable Court and the majesty of law in the eyes of the public," the petition said, seeking action against the IMA president.
The court has scheduled the next hearing for a later date, with the IMA counsel requesting time to respond to the court's concerns.
The developments come after the court's strong rebuke of Patanjali Ayurved's managing director, Acharya Balkrishna, and yoga guru Ramdev, for misleading ads claiming their products could cure health conditions such as high blood pressure and diabetes.
The two had to issue prominent apologies in newspapers as per the court's orders.
Celebrities, Influencers Equally Liable For Deceptive Ads:
The court also stated that celebrities and social media influencers will be held "equally liable" for misleading advertisements featuring them.
In a landmark ruling, the court ordered broadcasters to file a self-declaration form before airing any advertisements, confirming that they comply with the relevant rules.
"The provisions are meant to serve the consumers and ensure that the consumer is made aware of the kind of product being purchased from the market, particularly in the health and food sectors," the bench said.
"We don't want a lot of red tape. We don't want to make it difficult for advertisers to advertise. We only want to make sure there is responsibility," the court added.
The ruling also stated that celebrities and social media influencers will be held liable for misleading advertisements featuring them, and that ministries must establish procedures to encourage consumers to file complaints and ensure they are taken to their logical conclusion.
"The ministries need to set up procedures to encourage the consumer to lodge a complaint and then ensure it is taken to its logical conclusion instead of 'simply being endorsed or marked'," the bench said.
